Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Pushing it all the way to Court


Mr Spadge
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6406 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello, new chap here. I've read through as much of the forums as one can in five hours, although suspect, information-wise, that I've only scratched the surface; a little more research required before I take the plunge.

 

However, I do have a couple of queries -

  • Do many people actually push their cases all the way? I'm feeling particularly vindictive towards my bank, and, purely as a matter of principle, would take great satisfaction in not settling out of court.
  • Does exemption from legal fees apply to unemployed people who are not claiming benefits (i.e. me)?

Sorry if this stuff has been covered elsewhere, but I've not happened across it yet. Feel free to wag a finger in the direction of the relevant thread(s) and I'll be off with much forelock tugging.

Any views expressed in this post are entirely my own, and either based on diligent research or what the bloke down the pub told me. Prefix any possibly defamatory remarks with "It's just my view, but..." or "Allegedly..." and you won't need to sue me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Do many people actually push their cases all the way? I'm feeling particularly vindictive towards my bank, and, purely as a matter of principle, would take great satisfaction in not settling out of court.
  • Does exemption from legal fees apply to unemployed people who are not claiming benefits (i.e. me)?

 

Hi and welcome,

 

If people continue to push the banks they will eventually offer the full amount and you obviously have to accept the offer if it's the full amount. At the moment the banks really don't want to end up in court.

 

With regards to your second question I don't think you can get exemption unless you are on benefits, even if you are unemployed. But I could be wrong on this.

 

Lucid :)

Mindzai & Lucid vs Lloyds TSB

*Won unconditionally with contractual interest (29.85% compounded)

Lucid's Account - £749.62 * Joint Account - £2019.64 * Mindzai's Account - £595.65

*All settled in full - 6/2/07

*Hearings - 7/2/07

*Prelims sent - 9/8/06

_______

GOT A COURT DATE? A guide to the later stages

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should also remember that as much as we have an axes, or axes to grind, with banks, that if they offer to settle your claim in full before it gets to court then you have little choice effectively but to settle.

 

 

If they try to impose conditions on the claim or don't settle in full then you can continue to court, even then there are risks depending on what it is exactly that you want to press for in court.

 

HTH

 

Glenn

Kick the shAbbey Habit

 

Where were you? Next time please

 

 

Abbey 1st claim -Charges repaid, default removed, interest paid (8% apr) costs paid, Abbey peed off; priceless

Abbey 2nd claim, two Accs - claim issued 30-03-07

Barclaycard - Settled cheque received

Egg 2 accounts ID sent 29/07

Co-op Claim issued 30-03-07

GE Capital (Store Cards) ICO says theyve been naughty

MBNA - Settled in Full

GE Capital (1st National) Settled

Lombard Bank - SAR sent 16.02.07

MBNA are not your friends, they will settle but you need to make sure its on your terms -read here

Glenn Vs MBNA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your responses. Shame really, I was looking forward to dusting off my wig and robes...

Any views expressed in this post are entirely my own, and either based on diligent research or what the bloke down the pub told me. Prefix any possibly defamatory remarks with "It's just my view, but..." or "Allegedly..." and you won't need to sue me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...